Dr. Walter Kempner introduced the first comprehensive dietary program to treat chronic kidney disease, and in doing so, also revolutionized the treatment of other disorders, including obesity. Kempner was Professor Emeritus of Medicine at Duke, where he came up with the so-called “rice diet,” which basically consisted of rice, sugar, fruit, and fruit juices. Extremely low-sodium, low-fat, no animal fat, no cholesterol, no animal protein. The sugar was added as a source of calories so people wouldn’t lose too much weight. But some people need to lose weight; so, he started treating obese patients with a lower calorie version of the diet.

He published this analysis of 106 patients who lost at least 100 pounds—not because there were only 106. He was just picking the last 100 people who lost over 100 pounds, and by the time he finished looking through their charts, six more had joined the so-called century club. Average weight loss among them was 141 pounds. This study demonstrates that massively obese persons can achieve marked weight reduction—even normalization of weight—without hospitalization, surgery, or pharmacologic intervention. Here’s a weight chart of someone who lost, in a year, nearly 300 pounds: from 430 pounds down to 130 pounds.

One important fact to be gained from this study is that, despite the misconception to the contrary, massive obesity is not an uncorrectable malady. Weight loss can be achieved, massive obesity can be corrected, and it can be done without drastic intervention.

Well, the rice diet is pretty drastic. Definitely don’t try this at home. The rice diet is dangerous. It’s so restrictive that it “may cause serious electrolyte imbalances, unless the patient is carefully medically supervised with frequent blood and urine lab testing.” Dangerous, says who? Said the world’s #1 advocate for the rice diet—Dr. Kempner himself.

The best safe approximation of the diet, so, low in sodium, and also no animal fat, protein, and cholesterol, would be a vitamin B12-fortified diet centered around whole, unprocessed plant foods. But even a medically-supervised rice diet could be considered un-drastic compared to, like, getting one’s internal organs stapled or rearranged, wiring someone’s jaws shut, or even brain surgery.

Attempts have been made to destroy the parts of the brain associated with the sensation of hunger, by irradiation, or by going in through the skull and burning them out. It shows how ineffective most simpler forms of treatment are that anyone should think it reasonable to produce irreversible intracranial brain lesions in very obese patients.

The surgeons defended these procedures, explaining that their justification in attempting the operation is, of course, the very poor results of conventional therapy in gross obesity, and the dark prognosis, mental and physical, of the uncorrected condition. To which a critic replied, “Such strong feelings [about how dark the prognosis is] run the risk of being conveyed to the patient, to the effect of masking the operative dangers [of experimental surgery] and steam-rolling the patient’s approval.” To which the surgeon replied, “If any ‘steamrolling’ is taking place, it comes rather from obese patients who sometimes threaten suicide unless they are accepted for experimental surgical treatment.”

As of 2013, the American Medical Association officially declared obesity a disease, by identifying the enormous “humanitarian…impact of obesity as requiring the medical care and attention of other…diseases.” But the way we treat diseases these days involves drugs and surgery. Anti-obesity drugs have been pulled from the market again and again, after they started killing people: this “unrelenting fall of the pharmacological treatment of obesity.”

The same has happened with obesity surgeries. The procedure Kempner wrote about was discontinued because of the complication of causing irreversible cirrhosis of the liver. Here are the current procedures, including various reconfigurations of the digestive tract. Complications of surgery occur in almost about 20% of patients, nearly one in ten of which may be death. In one of the largest studies, 1.9% of patients died within a month of the surgery. “Even if surgery proves sustainably effective, the need to rely on the rearrangement of our…anatomy as an alternative to better use of feet and forks [diet and exercise] seems a societal travesty.”

To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video. This is just an approximation of the audio contributed by Katie Schloer.

Dr. Walter Kempner introduced the first comprehensive dietary program to treat chronic kidney disease, and in doing so, also revolutionized the treatment of other disorders, including obesity. Kempner was Professor Emeritus of Medicine at Duke, where he came up with the so-called “rice diet,” which basically consisted of rice, sugar, fruit, and fruit juices. Extremely low-sodium, low-fat, no animal fat, no cholesterol, no animal protein. The sugar was added as a source of calories so people wouldn’t lose too much weight. But some people need to lose weight; so, he started treating obese patients with a lower calorie version of the diet.

He published this analysis of 106 patients who lost at least 100 pounds—not because there were only 106. He was just picking the last 100 people who lost over 100 pounds, and by the time he finished looking through their charts, six more had joined the so-called century club. Average weight loss among them was 141 pounds. This study demonstrates that massively obese persons can achieve marked weight reduction—even normalization of weight—without hospitalization, surgery, or pharmacologic intervention. Here’s a weight chart of someone who lost, in a year, nearly 300 pounds: from 430 pounds down to 130 pounds.

One important fact to be gained from this study is that, despite the misconception to the contrary, massive obesity is not an uncorrectable malady. Weight loss can be achieved, massive obesity can be corrected, and it can be done without drastic intervention.

Well, the rice diet is pretty drastic. Definitely don’t try this at home. The rice diet is dangerous. It’s so restrictive that it “may cause serious electrolyte imbalances, unless the patient is carefully medically supervised with frequent blood and urine lab testing.” Dangerous, says who? Said the world’s #1 advocate for the rice diet—Dr. Kempner himself.

The best safe approximation of the diet, so, low in sodium, and also no animal fat, protein, and cholesterol, would be a vitamin B12-fortified diet centered around whole, unprocessed plant foods. But even a medically-supervised rice diet could be considered un-drastic compared to, like, getting one’s internal organs stapled or rearranged, wiring someone’s jaws shut, or even brain surgery.

Attempts have been made to destroy the parts of the brain associated with the sensation of hunger, by irradiation, or by going in through the skull and burning them out. It shows how ineffective most simpler forms of treatment are that anyone should think it reasonable to produce irreversible intracranial brain lesions in very obese patients.

The surgeons defended these procedures, explaining that their justification in attempting the operation is, of course, the very poor results of conventional therapy in gross obesity, and the dark prognosis, mental and physical, of the uncorrected condition. To which a critic replied, “Such strong feelings [about how dark the prognosis is] run the risk of being conveyed to the patient, to the effect of masking the operative dangers [of experimental surgery] and steam-rolling the patient’s approval.” To which the surgeon replied, “If any ‘steamrolling’ is taking place, it comes rather from obese patients who sometimes threaten suicide unless they are accepted for experimental surgical treatment.”

As of 2013, the American Medical Association officially declared obesity a disease, by identifying the enormous “humanitarian…impact of obesity as requiring the medical care and attention of other…diseases.” But the way we treat diseases these days involves drugs and surgery. Anti-obesity drugs have been pulled from the market again and again, after they started killing people: this “unrelenting fall of the pharmacological treatment of obesity.”

The same has happened with obesity surgeries. The procedure Kempner wrote about was discontinued because of the complication of causing irreversible cirrhosis of the liver. Here are the current procedures, including various reconfigurations of the digestive tract. Complications of surgery occur in almost about 20% of patients, nearly one in ten of which may be death. In one of the largest studies, 1.9% of patients died within a month of the surgery. “Even if surgery proves sustainably effective, the need to rely on the rearrangement of our…anatomy as an alternative to better use of feet and forks [diet and exercise] seems a societal travesty.”

To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video. This is just an approximation of the audio contributed by Katie Schloer.

137 responses to “Can Morbid Obesity be Reversed through Diet?”

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer moderators by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

As Dr McDougall would say, the Kempner Rice Diet is for those on their death beds (i.e., the dying). The McDougall program is for the living. And his MWL program can do everything the Rice Diet can with far less restriction.

Congratulations, Geos! And you documented it so well. Thank you for the inspiration. I have a relative whose husband has just agreed for the two of them to attend Dr McDougall’s 10 day program next month. I hope he catches your inspiration, because he seriously needs it. The man is a genius in his field, but his greatest exercise is tapping away at his keyboard all day, forgetting the need for water and eating terribly. And, of course, he is now reaping the consequences of a lifetime of this.

My inspiration is renewed. Time to get the fat out, to stop the granola and the occasional beer, and get back to the basics.

Hi geos. I wanted to thank you because your story helped motivate me to lose some weight over the past two months. My weight crept up last year in part because of exercise inactivity due to an injury but mainly due to eating too many vegan restaurant prepared meals high in oil, salt, and sugar. My starting point wasn’t that bad, being perhaps 15 to 20 lb over my target, but by using the McDougall Maximum Weight Loss principles (free information from the web) I was able to lose the extra weight effortlessly. In addition to weight, I’ll bet my total cholesterol is back down to less than 150.

I eat from a variety of recipes but my go to dinner is inspired by you: vegetables (onion, garlic, zucchini, bell pepper, corn cut off the cob, string beans, or whatever tastes good) sauteed in water and spiced with cumin served over a bed of steamed or baked potato and topped with salsa. This dish fills the whole plate and is filing and tasty.

Yes I’m one of the lucky ones. I did nothing special with my skin. It just naturally tightened back up. And unfortunately theres not a lot that can be done if your unlucky with loose skin short of gaining muscle to fill it out more or plastic surgery to cut it off (not something I would recommend).

I checked out your links on a whim and I’ve never seen anything like it. It’s crazy. Your numbers went from scary to amazing. Your cholesterol dropped what was it…100 points in 2 months? Those triglyceride numbers. And CRP. And the after pics. I’m speechless. It’s so sad that most doctors are more concerned about “standards of care” than pushing people towards what’s possible. I think most of them don’t even know what’s possible. Good for you that you took control.

Hi. I’m wondering about the Study of the Worlds Biggest Loosers In the NYTimes today. Specifically it looked to me as though the dieters were on a calorie restricted diet. I’m wondering if there are the same problems with a plant based diet leading to weight gain after loss and with the slowing of the metabolism.

There is NOT the same problem. The reason is that as you lose weight and become more insulin sensitive, the insulin level drops which resolves any leptin resistance (which is universal in overweight individuals and causes them to eat too much.) As the leptin resistance resolves, the hypothalamus can correctly regulate when to stop eating. In addition, a WFPB lifestyle is very low fat which resolves leptin resistance as well. In other words, on a WFPB lifestyle, you know when you’re full so you stop eating. Just look at all the proponents of WFPB lifestyles, like Dr. Esselstyn, McDougall, Greger, Barnard. They are all lean and healthy.

I’ve heard Dr. McDougall talk about how de novo lipogenesis, the conversion of carbohydrates into stored fat, is not efficient for the body to undertake, so carbohydrates rarely contribute to weight gain, do you agree with this?

Though small, this is is an interesting study, conclusion was-
“Glycogen storage capacity in man is approximately 15 g/kg body weight and can accommodate a gain of approximately 500 g before net lipid synthesis contributes to increasing body fat mass.”http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/48/2/240.short

So say you are a 55kg woman, you could theoretically eat about 1325g CHO per day before they would lead to lipid synthesis and increased body fat mass.

During overfeeding, subjects were given an average of 1398 g carbohydrate. The estimated amount of absolute fat production via de novo lipogenesis that this represents is only ≈4 g/day.

This agrees with previous studies in which hepatic de novo lipogenesis was found not to be a significant contributor to overall fat balance, with estimated fat production ranging from 1–2 g/d in lean men in energy balance (13, 18) to <5 g/d during overfeeding with carbohydrate in lean subjects of both sexes (24) or 7 g/d in exsmokers consuming an ad libitum diet (25). Adipose tissue de novo lipogenesis in lean and obese subjects was shown to be as low as hepatic de novo lipogenesis (2–5 g/d) in free-living conditions in which subjects consumed their usual (in terms of energy and macronutrient composition) diet (4).

Regardless of which dietary manipulations have been considered to date—excess energy or excess carbohydrate in lean or obese subjects or in men or women—the amount of de novo lipogenesis measured still represents a minor fraction of the disposal of dietary carbohydrate.

Although de novo lipogenesis was greater in the obese subjects than in the lean ones while the subjects were in energy balance, there was no significant difference between subject groups after overfeeding. However, de novo lipogenesis was highly positively correlated with both body weight and with precise measurements of whole-body fat balance. Quantitatively, however, absolute amounts of fat synthesized from carbohydrate did not represent a significant contribution to overall fat stores after 96 h of excess carbohydrate intake.

No, I don’t agree. I’m very efficiient at turning carbo into fat. We usually eat vegetables, fruits, nuts, whole grains, legumes. We went to a camp 100th reunion and all they had was carbohydrates – refined bread, baked potato, cake (I skipped the icing) (I don’t do meat or dairy) plus some fruit and some salad, . I put on a pound. plus. It took 10 days of usual nutrition and exercise to get back down to weight.

Yes they lost weight but were these patients followed for the next five to ten years to determine if the weight loss was sustained? Many diets can get people to lose weight and to decease blood pressure the only problem is that these same people tend to not sustain the weight loss. These extraordinary losses of weight are great but only if sustained. Just look at the study on the biggest loser contestants, they all lost weight but they regained it as well. Long term weight and energy homeostasis doesn’t seem to use a calculator because as soon as people stop losing weight they have a nearly impossible time “balancing” the their total energy needs consciously. Love to see long term follow up of patients on rice diet is all I am saying….

It’s a life style change. If you keep eating a whole food plant based diet (Kepner with whole foods instead of white rice.) you will not gain weight back. Long term consumption of a whole food plant diet will keep you from gaining weight. Just don’t eat animal products and take a B12 supplement and you will keep the weight off. A good diet plan can be found at PCRM.org or ForksoverKinves.com.

Yes it’s a matter of changing what you eat. You can eat plant foods all you want and still not gain weight. In fact you can eat a diet of whole grain, beans, nuts, seeds, sweet potato, etc. that is very fulfilling to your stomach and not gain weight at all and in fact it makes you healthier. I now eat nuts or an apple when I feel craving for sugar or snack or something to put in my mouth instead of going to a vending machine and buy a bag of cheetos.

So when you are starving yourself, you cannot keep up for very long, but when you eat some plant foods instead, you satisfy your stomach but don’t gain weight and even get healthier the more you eat. So the method to lose weight should be eat more but eat more healthy plant foods.

Let us not mislead people and make false claims. If you over eat even on a whole food plant based diet, you will gain weight. Now there are many mechanisms in that diet to help manage your weight, from volume of food, natural satiety mechanisms, and (generally) a higher carb diet doesn’t allow too much fat storage, but if you keep over eating you will have problems. So it is much easier to maintain a life long healthy weight, but keep shoving food in you don’t really need, like people do on SAD, and the results are similar, if slower.

You are correct on paper, at least, no doubt. But it’s so difficult to gain weight eating plants that it’s not a great danger. Telling someone they can “eat plant foods all you want” is generally safe advice. You’ll eventually get full before you hit a dangerous level of calories. 500 calories of potatoes is not the same as 500 calories of chocolate. People eating SAD will continue to crave more food because they’re not getting the things the body wants, and so they’ll not stop at 500 calories of chocolate. 500 calories of potatoes, if you can eat it, will make you so full you can’t move, provided that they’re not fried or covered in sour cream (but then, that’s no longer really 500 calories of “potatoes”).

The biggest danger in your scenario, IMO, is when people rely too heavily on grains, which are calorie dense and easy to overeat, particularly if ground into flour. Processed nut butters (my weakness) also add too many calories too quickly. Either of these choices as primary ingredients of a diet can bring your fears to fruition, because not all plant foods are calorically dilute. A reliance on vegetables, fruit and beans as the primary staples of your diet is a better choice.

Yes, but some people also have binge eating problems, and stuff themselves repeatedly. It happens.
You definitely need to not eat mindlessly, people need to be aware of what they eat and how they feel so they don’t feel bad after. It can take a long time for even those that try to fix their problems to achieve results.

That’s because like other herbivores we have a need to constantly eat. That’s why raw natural fruits, vegetables, and nuts have such high volume and low calories. These obese people were not on “Calorie Restrictive” diets. Dr. Kepner did not restrict their eating habits and they still lost weight eating the right foods.

Plant foods that are man-made (processed sugar, lollipops, candies, etc….), Genetically Modified fruits, vegetables and nuts, etc….can and will make you sick and fat. So stick with natural plant foods that our bodies have been specifically designed for eating, after millions of years of evolution.

About whole grain for instance, you have to choose unprocessed grain that has all the phytonutrients that go along. So for instance eat quinoa instead of some slice of bread which for the most part prepared with processed flour. Eat more whole nut than nut butter. Eat the whole almond rather almond milk. Eat a whole orange rather than drinking orange juice. When I say plant foods, I mean unprocessed and whole.

This is where the distinction between whole food, plant based diets vs vegan or vegetarian is made. I have met many vegans, who eat a lot of junk food. The gentleman who shared his amazing transformation, indicated in the beginning of his story that there were “ongoing explanations and technical details” that he was given along the way. Dr. Greger’s daily dozen recommendations is one of those explanations that can be incredibly helpful to balance food choices.

…and raw nuts including peanuts. Beans I am not so crazy about because we cannot eat them raw. But Bean is an excellent protein rich alternative to meat. It has about the same % of protein at 1/5th the price and you can eat as much as you want without supporting the animal torture industry.

This is not true from my own and family experience. Of course this cannot be called scientific study or anything because it involves a small sample of people, but we eat a lot of plant foods and never gain weight. And a lot of studies have shown that you cannot just add up the calories because it depends on the food you eat. For instance 100 calorie from sugar is not the same as 100 calorie from plant food because there is the fiber that goes along. Also from a practical point of view, you will get full very quickly with plant foods because of all the fiber and you can only eat so much.

Believe what you want including starve yourself to lose weight. It works too.

P.S. and stop calling me misleading people when you don’t know what you are talking about.

Yep Nick, I can vouch for that. I stick to a pretty rigid whole food (no oil) vegan diet and can still gain weight easily if I don’t limit my intake! Even after being morbidly obese and losing half my body weight, I am still technically overweight with a BMI of 27+.

Once the entire system has been “attacked” by a state of obesity as you describe , a reset in the hypothalamus has occurred as was theorized by Dr Simeon in the 1950’s. Many such insults to the “hypothalamus ” can occur during a person’s lifetime including pregnancies , hypothyroidism and simply aging. I am a doctor myself and have never been obese nor am I an expert on diets etc..
However , I have been mainly a plant and very little fish occasional eater since my teens when I was diagnosed with multinodular hypothyroidism . Eating very little including no eggs no milk no cheese no meats no chicken no junk food no sodas ever never allowed me to keep my size. 4 for life. However, when my thyroid disease became worse 4 years ago I tried DrSimeons HCG diet and it stabilized my weight immediately . Now I continue to eat what I always did : mainly a plant diet with occasional white fish and fruits ( no bananas). I have since advised a few morbidly obese patients to try this diet as they were contemplating bariatric surgery . The ones who tried it lost weight and were amazed that they could later revert to a more plant based diet with fewer meat products. If anyone has any personal experience with this diet I would like to hear about it . I’m not advocating this diet just wanting more information .

Same here. When I was young I could eat anything and not gain weight, including lots and lots of animal foods. Now at 48 I even have to watch that I don’t overeat on a very strict Daily Dozen diet… I gain weight so easily around my midsection now. Some people have the health of youth and they probably think that is going to go on forever.

Genetical variability, or biochemical variability, or whatever else we could call it matters, too. I’ve been underweight all my life and for several years have been trying to gain some weight, without eating junk food or being a couch potato of course, so that I wouldn’t feel so cold in winter. I eat a lot of energy-rich foods like grain (mostly rice), nuts, and dried fruits, with no success. A nutritionist, whom I once met socially, suggested that I eat a lot of cheese cake!

Yes & No. It’s similar to gaining weight by drinking too much water. You will surely gain weight, but it all come out. You can eat too much by force Raw “fruits, vegetables and nuts” and in the long run you will not gain weight and if you are overweight, you will lose weight. If you eat too much of above, you will probably have to go to bathroom a lot and cannot sleep (too much energy) and need to run around the block and have sex like a rabbit. Unless you are in prison or kept in a box (like livestock commodities), I don’t think you will gain weight in the long run.

You are absolutely correct, Ray. If people eat whole food with fiber and phytonutrients and all, they can eat as much as they want (and the body will tell them it cannot take in anymore) and not gain weight. The problem is that people don’t eat real food and whole. Of course you have to be selective to what you eat. For instance peanut which is not a nut, is full of Omega-6 and you should not eat too much. Foods that don’t come with fiber should be eaten with moderation although they have nutrients such as walnut, almond, seeds, etc.

You cannot really do the math and add up all the calories and then you have to over exercise to burn those calories because there is also the fiber. For instance 500 calories from sugar is pure calorie because there is no fiber in it while 500 calories from fruits and vegetables are not the same because of the fiber. That’s why the calorie count does not work. The other flaw with most weight loss program is that they restrict how much people can eat. Sure people lose weight while eating less but they cannot keep up for very long. I say let people eat when they feel hungry but eat more of whole plant foods with fiber.

Many maybe even most, but certainly not all people will not gain weight on the best possible diet… I do the best possible daily dozen diet and I can still gain weight if I eat too many calories. This was not true when I was younger but it is now, at 48, I am just less efficient now and I have to watch my caloric intake. Intermittent fasting as helped me to lower my calorie intake and keep my waist slim.

I am the opposite of you. Now I am getting older (I am older than 48), I actually lose weight by eating more plant foods. My food consumption is much more than before but it is more plant foods and I lose weight. I am not a vegan and I do eat meat at lunch although not a lot, but I only eat plant foods in the evening and I eat 4 hours before bed. I only exercise moderately. To be fair to those who gain weight even when they eat healthy and a lot of fiber, I consume other things as well. I eat a lot of probiotics food (my homemade sauerkraut) and take probiotics supplement as well. I also take other supplements when it’s needed. Perhaps it is the whole equation, from fiber to digestion, that makes one not gain weight. I don’t know because I am not a scientist, but it works for me and my family and close friends.

Just an advice for everyone, weight is one thing but you need the nutrients as well. At least eat the recommended DailyDozen from Dr Greger before thinking about losing weight. Some people have the metabolism of looking overweight although they are healthy. Take for instance Dr Veil, he looks overweight but he is healthy and he is a vegan as well. I would not cut down on my foods and have insufficient nutrition just for the sake of looking thin.

You don’t get it. I want to see the study showing that these individuals or another trial using this diet with extended follow up after the study to show it does indeed work. There is no follow up seemingly that shows these patients maintained their improvements.

There is also a country who in the past forty years has increased it’s consumption of meat so and you can see a corresponding increase in diseases of affluence. Read “The China Study,” by Collin Campbell.

I’ll say this, eating a Standard American Diet is an unhealthy way of eating, it causes all of the current diseases of affluence. There is no need to have a group of folks come into a lab and eat more bacon to see if is bad for them. Americans are all happily going to many fast food restaurants and eating that junk already. What I do know is that switching to a whole food plant based diet can reverse many of these illnesses. It did it for me, and I know it will do it for you.

The difference between a scientist and a doctor is that a scientist may continue a study that proves to be unhealthy for the participant of the study. If a doctor is conducting a study that proves to be unhealthy for the participant, the doctor ends the study because it is unethical to continue it.

If you are unsure about the concepts behind a Whole Food Plant Based diet please go these websites to see exactly what doctors do know on this subject:
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine: PCRM.org
Forks over Knives: ForksoverKnives.com
Dr. McDougall’s website: drmcdougall.com
Dr. Fuhrman’s website: drfuhrman.com
Dr. Ornish’s website: ornish.com
Dr. Pritkin’s website: pritikin.com
You should also watch the video on Nutrition Facts called “From Table to Able” http://nutritionfacts.org/video/from-table-to-able/

Yes but I want to see data on these patients years down the line that they maintained diet and maintained drops in blood pressure, decreased fasting blood sugars etc. There are multiple diets out there that can show benefit in the short term through weight loss decreases in BP etc. but they patients tend to regain the weight and lose benefits to BP blood glucose etc. I want to see data that these people did otherwise I am skeptical about long-term efficacy because so many diets fail at that.

I understand your point and I think one has to assess the obesity issue holistically with mind, body, life style as well as diet. I also think each individual has to deal with the weight loss issue by looking at the root cause of it and resolve that otherwise as you mentioned after the diet period the weight gain can reoccur.

It is a travesty. I’m sure I just “inflamed” a few friends at FB. I shared this and added a lot of my words. It’s so easy and no one thinks that it is- apparently because no one is spending millions to sell it to them. Travesty that our society tends to believe the artificial stories that are sold to them daily and repetitively to move profitable products and services SO MUCH MORE than the real truth, that could save them from extended illness, and premature death and other complications we needn’t suffer.

It’s just easy. WFPB-5/7 is my “style” of it and it even works without exercise. But yes, exercise makes LIFE better by itself if you choose the right workout for yourself. Mine is cycling (and to be rowing when I make a rowing boat). I didn’t ride much (hardly any) during my initial weight loss, because I was fascinated how effortlessly I was losing weight. I’ll always advocate exercise though, it has great mental benefits and will certainly assist with the weight loss aspects of eating properly.

Eating properly rewards one with life, more pleasant and obesity free.

And to be clear, I don’t mean to “inflame” folks at all, but only HOPE to help a few begin to find their way back to good health and to provide an example and a method as I have discovered works for me-who _really_ only got healthy at 49 years of age.

In order to “ease the transition” I started out eating WFPB 5 days and allowing myself to eat anything on the weekend. This worked with my “encounter with Fruitarianism (always hungry-ism)” and also works quite well with WFPB. I hope that It might help those who aren’t fully convinced to give meatlessness a chance. It gives a way to satiate cravings without “breaking” the plan. So it could be notated 5/2 as well. Of course one could 6/1 it, and a person is free to eat as “clean” as he/she choses on the “off” days. If you weigh regularly and accurately, you’ll see how the weekends of “more indulgence” go STRAIGHT to weight gain. I charted it.

Shouldn’t take too much willpower to try something for 5 days, just a little planning ahead. I could FEEL the difference in 2 or 3 days, that’s how I got “hooked” and things just kept getting better.

Hello everyone – I have question that is completely off topic for this video, but I want some help from this community. I work in the sun daily in the Western United States where the sun is strong and at high altitude. I am looking for a good sunscreen sunblock, both UVA/UVB. I need to apply this every day. I am very uncomfortable slathering my body with these chemicals as we all know that the skin absorbs readily what we put on it (think nicotine patches, chemotherapy nausea drugs, hormone patches, etc). So I would like to know what folks from this community, who also have my dilemma, use to protect their skin. I would so appreciate any good information on this topic (sorry, I don’t know where else to post). Thank you ever so much!!

Thank you George for your good thoughts. However, this is not what i’m looking for from this community. I already – and have for years – eaten a WFPB diet, antioxidants, etcs. I already do what I can for consumption of good things antioxidant-wise for my body.
It’s not enough. I need and am looking for a good sunscreen as I work out doors, all day long, in direct hot sun. I need more than blueberries and strawberries. And if you saw my skin you would agree. So I am ABSOLUTELY gong to protect my skin with other options (and yes, I already use wide brimmed hat, sun glasses, cover up, seek shade (whcih cannot be done when you’re on teh clock for someone else) . .yes, yes, yes, . . I already know to do all of that.)
I am just asking the question about sun tan lotion or sun screening lotion/block etc. that anyone in this community has used that is chemically less cancer-causing or less chemically-worrisome than the others.
I get the whole “eat-healthy” perspective and I do it.
My question is about sun block – only – anybody have any good recommendations? Thanks in advance.

If you want the safest products, start with Environmental Working Group’s recommendations, they’re ranked safest to least safe. I tried some of their recommended as most safe products, they were not for me, too sticky, opaque. You could work your way up the list until you found one that appealed to you, but that would be expensive and time consuming ( the most natural products also tend to be the most expensive).

My intention is to take Consumer Report’s list of tested effective sunscreens and cross reference the EWG’s safest products and find a good sunscreen. If you get around to it before I do, please tell us what you find. Thanks.

Ranchers in Wyoming wear long sleeve shirts. I was out there camping a few years ago and my drivers side arm got to looking really bad. Try a 10 gallon hat? Good wrap-around sunglasses? 5K to 7K avg altitude.

Scientists unraveling how fasting retards aging may be close to discovering how the rice diet works. Mark McCarty, who scours PubMed as assiduously as Dr. Greger, proposes in this review that the insulin sensitizing hormone FGF 21 mediates the metabolic benefits of lower lysine and methionine vegan diets. Dr. Kempner’s rice diet is on the extreme side here, offering only about 60% of the lysine requirement. A new pilot scale study that found that moderate protein restriction to 7-9% of calories improved metabolic health, with a notable doubling of FGF 21. As for the fruit and sugar, one of a few recent studies that have found a positive side to fructose found it acutely stimulates circulating FGF 21.

The Rice Diet instituted by Dr. Kempner at Duke University involved a residential program where people lived for up to a year or more.
I read a book, The Rice Diet Solution by Kitty Gurkin Rosati and Robert Rosati, MD, who took over the program after Dr. Kempner retired.
The residential program became independent from Duke and then I read in the news that it had closed since people were not enrolling in the program any more. There were some big name entertainers who had gone into the program such as Shelly Winters, Lorne Greene, and Buddy Hackett. I remember seeing them on television years ago.
The rice diet as promoted by Dr. Kempner involved a supervised program in which food consumption was supervised and people also walked or exercised under supervision. Apparently enrolling in the Rice Diet program under Kempner was like enrolling in boot camp, according to Jean Renfro Anspaugh, who enrolled in the program after a patio chair collapsed under her and dropped out of law school. She ran out of money before reaching her goal but got a job with the program and apparently continued. She wrote a book about the program, “Fat Like Us” and said that “One at rice and fruit and walked”. The staff didn’t care what you thought, only what you ate and how often you exercised”. The program closed down since insurance wouldn’t cover it, while alternative weight loss treatments such as by-pass surgery are covered.
The program was pretty rigid, and one patient, Sharon Ryan, sued Duke and Dr. Kempner in 1993, and said between 1970 and 1983, Dr. Kempner whipped her bare buttocks with a riding crop when she violated the strict rules and gained weight. Dr. Kempner had responded in a deposition that weight gain was such a serious problem or the risk to their lives was so great that if they deviated from his regimen that he thought harshness was warranted. The story of the residential program shutting down was posted on the internet under Fox News Health under the story, Rice Diet shuts down North Carolina Home after 70 years, dated Sept 10, 2013 for those interested about details of the program. I bought the book, the Rice Diet Solution by the Rosati’s in a Goodwill store for a dollar and did find it interesting and am interested in losing weight.
The post on the internet did note that it is very difficult to maintain the dietary guidelines due to continually feeling hunger, and so some other dietary programs such as the Paleo diet have been introduced, since there is less of a feeling of hunger and people are able to adhere to them better.
So while the Rice Diet has advocates, it was really part of a residential program in which people would stay at the home under the supervision of the staff, and were encouraged to adhere to the dietary guidelines and walk a lot. It did do a lot of good for some people but I have my doubts that a person is able to go on the diet and stay on it and exercise without strict supervision, meaning essentially being in a boot camp. There’s nothing wrong with that, and it has helped a lot of people. It’s kind of like the TV program about the “Biggest Loser” in which there is a fitness coach or coaches helping people to lose weight, or at least that’s what I thought it was when watching the program.
There are some advantages to weight loss surgery, one of the biggest being that bypass surgery will frequently relieve type II diabetes. It isn’t very well understood as to the exact reasons, but possibly has something to do with the amino acids which are absorbed. The type 2 diabetes may be relieved within days, even before there has been much weight loss, so that is one advantage of surgery.
The Rice Diet apparently was pretty effective in relieving blood pressure and even hypertensive retinopathy, although now blood pressure medicines can reduce blood pressure probably more effectively. The Rice Diet was introduced back in the thirties or forties I think, before most of the modern blood pressure medicines were developed, so at the time, it responded to a very serious need since blood pressure is one of the biggest killers.
So probably in the issue of weight gain, especially in serious or life threatening morbid obesity, it’s whatever works.
If diet works, then great, if not then probably something else. Usually diet and exercise but most people never willingly get to morbid obesity, but just find themselves there and then become more and more desperate to get out.
Genome or genetics probably has a lot to do with it. There was a very large study, over half a million patients, named the GIANT study, to find out what part of the genome regulates human body size. They found more than a hundred different locations in the genome which are related to obesity traits. The study was published in a couple of Nature articles Feb 11, 2015. So while diet and exercise has a lot to do with obesity, there probably are many genetic reasons as well why some people are obese and others aren’t.
Further analysis of these genes and what they do to metabolism will probably be necessary, possibly even finding medicines which interfere or promote their function, before there will be good treatments for obesity.
Diet in the majority of cases, especially unsupervised diet, meaning not being in a program where meals are probably rationed and a person has a diet and exercise coach, probably doesn’t work for most people.
Although no one probably wants such drastic surgery such as bypass surgery, most people are pretty desperate by the time the get to that point and are willing to try about anything.
I think most programs have psychological screening of potential candidates for bypass surgery, and also patients need to change their life style, more exercise, less food, or eventually they gain back a lot of the weight they lost with the bypass surgery.
Will simply changing to all vegetable diets help? Probably like everything else people have tried for morbid obesity, it’s worth trying but I suspect if you’re one of those people that has the set of genes identified in the GIANT study that is going to promote obesity, it will probably be harder for you to lose weight, even with an all vegetable diet, but still certainly worth trying since it would promote better health in the long run.

Note that this system is not just about eating veggies. If all you ate were veggies, it might be hard to get enough calories and to get enough of the proper nutrients. In other words, no one here is recommending that anyone trying to lose weight on their own eat *just* veggies. I just want to clarify because of the speculation you have at the end of your post.

My understanding has always been that a vegetable is any edible plant or plant part – this includes fruits, nuts, seeds, leaves, tubers etc. Think of the old “Animal, vegetable or mineral?” tv show for example. And this is also why people who eat plant only diets are called vegetarians (I suppose that fungi are honorary plants).

Tom Goff: I’d say that the justification for me using the narrower definition is that that is how the term is used now by the majority of people. I’m familiar with the older definition, but I know of no one (except you?) who uses that definition in general conversation (outside of car games?). So, if I see a post that about veggies, I assume the poster is only talking about those edible plants which fall outside the categories of fruits, grains, legumes, nuts or seeds.
.
If you are saying that you commonly use the broader definition for ‘vegetable’, you would be the first person in my experience where that is the case. I’ll have to try to remember that!
.
I don’t know if this will mean anything to you or not, but I know from at least one video and maybe in his book too, Dr. Greger made it clear that he is aware of the technical definition of a vegetable. But in practice the vast majority of the time, Dr. Greger uses the common, modern definition. You can see that practice in action in the Daily Dozen where one of the dozen is “Other Vegetables”, which is defined with examples such as artichokes, beets, and corn. But not grains, legumes, etc.

Yes, thanks, Thea. It is just my inner pedant coming out to play. I am not criticising you – merely wanting to put my opinions on the record.

I know that the modern practice is just to refer to only certain vegetables as vegetables. Just as it is to refer to (completely) vegetarian diets as vegan diets when there is really no such thing as a vegan diet. All vegans eat a (completely) vegetarian diet but not all people who eat (completely) vegetarian diets are vegans.

This is swimming against the current I know but I occasionally like to get up on the soapbox and argue for “correct” usage rather than popular usage. Precise language facilitates clearer thinking (well, that is my argument).

It is probably just a personal failing – perhaps some lexical version of obsessive compulsive disorder!

Gatherer: Joan E’s idea is great if you have the right kind of cell phone. If you are not able to run a phone app (you are not alone), you have the option of reading Dr. Greger’s new book, How Not To Die. The entire second part of the book is about the Daily Dozen. But if you just want an overview, you can also get it from the first few pages of Part 2. If you can’t get the book for yourself, I think a lot of libraries carry it.
.
I’m guessing that the Daily Dozen does not have it’s own page on this site, because we want to encourage people to get the book (of which all proceeds support this site). However, you can get a sense of what the Daily Dozen is (not explanations of servings, but see the overview) in the following video which flashes a picture of the Daily Dozen and explains a bit how Dr. Greger developed it. You can pause on the picture.http://nutritionfacts.org/video/book-trailer-for-how-not-to-die/

Hi moderator. Thanks for the responses. I am concerned about some of the information however.

Some things like dietary treatment of hypertension are essentially the same as the Web MD advise on food choices.

Rather than an either/or response, either diet (food choices) or medications for treatment of hypertension, I think they refer to it as the “DASH diet”, it is much more likely to take a more moderate approach by utilizing medications under medical supervision to get the blood pressure under control and also make some food choices which are likely to be beneficial as well.

The combined approach may make it possible to reduce the amounts of medications and possibly even eliminate them if the blood pressure does respond to a food choice and exercise approach. Genetics has a lot to do with hypertension as well and sometimes there are even underlying physical causes of hypertension such as renal artery stenosis or even some types of adrenal tumors, although these are more rare causes, the overwhelming hypertensives being afflicted with “essential hypertension” which does not have a distinctive cause although probably has a lot to do with weight, exercise and genetics.

With respect to type 2 diabetes management, it probably is even more important to get the blood sugar under control, and it may call for a “full court press” as they say in basketball, with medications, food choices and exercise.

Motivation is important, as is ability, and again, genetics has a large role in development of such conditions.

Type one diabetes is an entirely different condition, and necessitates insulin or the individual is likely to die quickly since probably the pancreas has been damaged by a virus or else there is some aspect of auto-immunity with damage to the insulin producing part of the pancreas. Again, common sense food choices are essential in management of all types of diabetes.

I haven’t heard of simply weight loss likely relieving diabetes although there are dramatic cases in which a person becomes highly motivated, often after a brush with death, and develops great exercise habits and food choices with resulting weight loss and increase in muscle mass with clearance of type 2 diabetes, but it is probably the exception rather than the rule.

For most people, changes come gradually with some increase in exercise, some decrease in food intake with better food choices and reduction in need for medicine with monitoring of blood sugars under medical supervision. If everything goes right, they may get off diabetes medicine, usually oral medicines, sometimes even insulin, but it’s never an easy road and often there are detours or dead ends.

I did see some more about the treatment in some residential programs. The approaches in the past probably won’t pass in our modern consent based society, especially things like whipping to instill compliance or even locking someone in a room for six weeks (I read about this somewhere, but not sure where it was a practice), although this undoubtedly would have dramatic results, but if anything, it just shows the difficulty of instituting such programs and instilling changes in food choice and exercise habits, even in the highly motivated who have willingly entered such programs but can’t sustain the efforts involved. Perhaps the old saying is applicable, “The spirit is willing but the body is weak”.

You write that you have not heard of simple weight loss relieving T2D. I think it is pretty widely accepted that weight loss does in fact relieve T2D. Medscape has a very good article on this subject …..
“weight loss alone improves the pathophysiology of Type 2 diabetes and may reverse it in certain clinical situations. As shown in Figure 1, exercise and gastric bypass surgery have weight-independent effects on insulin sensitivity and incretin stimulation, which collectively work to reverse β-cell dysfunction and restore normal glucose regulation.”http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/746806_4

Hi Tom Goff. Thanks for the response. Certainly weight loss is likely to relieve if not cure type 2 diabetes if the person is obese.
I think what I meant was that weight loss itself in the obese is not very common, unless a person becomes very highly motivated.
Probably food choice changes and the amounts eaten can make a difference, but obesity in the population, even in children, statistically at least is an increasing problem. This is resulting in a lot of different interventions to lose weight, such as stomach banding, bypass surgery, and even the recent introduction of a stomach drain, in which food which has been consumed can be drained off through tubing introduced into the stomach and draining the food off into a waste container.
Of course, most of these surgical procedures would be necessary if people could change their food choices to a more favorable profile and exercise more, but as is often the case, the simplest things are the hardest to do.
About 15% of people in the US with Type 2 diabetes however are not obese and don’t have an elevated BMI. It’s thought they have more metabolically active visceral fat, which is probably the most dangerous type of fat. Those are people who probably need to change food choices to food less likely to spike sugars, and to exercise more. They are probably the exception to the rule, so no rule is going to fit everybody.
By and large, usually weight loss is good for diabetes and also for cardiovascular state including hypertension and cardiovascular disease.
Thanks

Medications treat the NUMBERS, not the underlying cause. The advantages of a plant-based diet confer far better mortality/morbidity than drug treatment to meet numbers.. but that’s how you can fund a clinical trial pitting one drug against another…

Saying hypertension is genetic is hard as there is environmental confounding, and also other factors for example- is it genetic high blood pressure or genetic salt sensitivity? I have seen far to many people’s blood pressures drop levels beyond any drugs ability to believe genetics is that much of a contributor… remove the food poison and the salt and it flies down.

Renal artery stenosis is usually the same aetiology as atherosclerosis…. plant based diet can help there again, and the vast majority do not have adrenal tumours. Pheochromocytoma is the cause in less than 0.2% of hypertension… it’s not really a valid argument. Hypertension falls into the same ship as heart disease, stroke and type two diabetes… It’s the food… and no one wants it to be…’essential hypertension’? Essentially eating the wrong food for most people.

I would suggest a great review article in the medical journal “Hypertension”, by Theodore A. Kotchen, titled “Historical Trends and Milestones in Hypertension Research, A Model of the Process of Translational Research, 2011; 58: 522-538.
The article is available on the internet and describes how blood pressure was measured initially, how it was recognized to be important, especially by the life and health insurance industry which started taking blood pressures as a routine part of the health and life insurance physical examination.

There is mention of limitation of salt, dietary and life style approaches to management as well as introduction of blood pressure medications.
Hypertension is a growing problem as people live longer lives. In the United States, according to the article, approximately 73 million Americans have hypertension and and the blood pressure is not controlled in approximately 50% of those with hypertension. It remains an enormous problem and contributes to death and disability, the disability being a serious issue for those with strokes and heart attacks.

I personally (after working with water fasting patients and others with an SOS free whole food plant based diet at True North health) am yet to see a patient that couldn’t reduce their blood pressure and needed medications (unless maybe there was some other large underlying issue).. Hypertension is not an issue until the food is an issue. The issue of age is not a world wide phenomenon-http://nutritionfacts.org/video/high-blood-pressure-may-be-a-choice/

Your article was an interesting read, but I’m not sure what you want to support?

Thanks for the response. Probably there are some programs where specific food choices help, and even eliminate the need for blood pressure medicines, however for the bulk of the population, blood pressure medicines are necessary to reduce the consequences such as renal failure, stroke and coronary artery disease. I’m not trying to disparage any specific program, but for most people, blood pressure medicines are necessary.

Epidemiological data would tend to support this approach, since the incidence of strokes and coronary artery disease has gone down since the introduction of blood pressure medicines, probably back in the 50’s.

I am going to have to respectfully agree to disagree with you. Medication is NOT necessary to lower blood pressure for the bulk of the population, as explained in videos above, hypertension doesn’t exist in many populations on traditional diets, and can be reversed on WFPB diets, as well as preventing the consequences, sometimes even reversing them (e.g. Walter Kempner).

Thanks for the response. I reviewed the internet sites you included in the post. You have mentioned “True North”, although I was not acquainted with the program but it does appear to be primarily a residential or supervised type of program where people are able to stay for various lengths of time and have supervised programs such as water fasting, with good results for the water fasting of ten days duration. Although effective, I’m not sure how practical it is for most people, however it is interesting that fasting and just being able to drink water for ten days is able to lower blood pressure.

It would be interesting to see what proportion of people are able to complete the ten day water fasting program, since fasting is somewhat challenging.

Also, is physical activity or exercise encouraged during fasting, or are people limited on their physical activity?

I wasn’t able to see how long the duration of the blood pressure reduction is following the period of water fasting.

Still, most people are probably going to need to be on blood pressure medicines, since I don’t think fasting programs, even under supervision are acceptable to most people.

Also, I didn’t see any mention of age categories with reference to the hypertension. Although I may have overlooked it, hypertension is primarily a condition of older people, and is quite rare among young people, although someone with obesity might be the exception.

For some people with obesity, undoubtedly, the fasting program would be beneficial as far as weight loss is concerned.

Even though people are motivated to lose weight, they may have continuous hunger which causes further eating with weight gain. This may be one of the aspects of the metabolic syndrome. Some persons with extensive, high intensity exercise are able to lose weight and lower their blood pressure, however it calls for high motivation, otherwise everyone would be doing it.

Prolonged fasting, with supervision, possibly with coaching or motivators probably would be preferable to bypass surgery for the intractably or dangerously obese who have attempted the commonly accepted recommendations for diet and exercise and still haven’t been able to lose weight. Any type of surgery has risks and with the rise of increasingly resistant organisms to most if not all available antibiotics, alternatives to surgery may become increasingly important in the future.

Whilst going to True North is of course not for everyone, it proves a point, that blood pressure can be reduced without drugs in almost all people. Most people manage just fine, up to 40 days for some!

Complete rest. It’s for healing.

The blood pressure stays reduced if they follow a SOS-free WFPB diet.

I don’t know why you keep going back to meds. Fasting is free, a healthy diet is available to almost everyone…

Hypertension is step-wise in western societies as the atherosclerosis builds up, so does the BP.

Water fasting induces weight loss, but is not a weight loss technique, eating WFPB is better and more sustainable.

Thanks for the response.
in response to the question,”I don’t know why you keep going back to meds”. Evidence based medicine is all in favor of medications. It has become elementary to medical practice. Millions of people are on blood pressure medicine, and they would be dead if they weren’t on them.

The life expectancy around 1940, before the introduction of blood pressure medicine, was females 65, males 61 years while in 1998, it was females 79, males72. Probably some further change now.

The incidence of massive strokes has dropped as well, since high blood pressure would cause change in cerebral or brain blood vessels, while they are much rarer now. People still have heart attacks, but the rate has dropped quite a bit. While life style changes such as exercise are helpful in the long term, interventions such as stenting to open up the blood vessels can be life saving in the short term.

While I can understand that fasting might lower blood pressure, how many people can stop their lives, go into a facility for weeks, with “complete rest”.

The complete rest cure went out of style in the thirties and forties.

Please don’t take this as a disparaging comment.

I would be surprised if any insurance company would pay for a stay for “complete rest”. They don’t do it.

I looked at the website on “True North” and with reference to insurance or medicare payments, I think the statement was that it pays for laboratory tests and the admitting medical examination, but I don’t think insurance or medicare pays for the stay in the facility.

I’m glad complete fasting is not part of the weight loss program, although it probably would help some people.

The thing is, saying blood pressure medicine is not necessary doesn’t fit with any of the medical evidence of hundreds of studies of blood pressure medicines used for people with various blood pressure problems, many with severe, life threatening conditions and the blood pressure medicines have been life saving.

That’s why I keep going back to the medicines, they are first line treatment in every medical facility I am acquainted with.

StevenRobert: I think you are mixing two concepts: necessary vs what is happening now. You claim that blood pressure medicine is “necessary”. That has been proven false by TrueNorth. Also, other people who follow WFPB diets are able to get rid of high blood pressure medicine on their own, without fasting–just by eating a healthy diet. WFPB diets work so well and often so quickly that people who are on high blood pressure meds are advised to work with their doctors when they go on a salt-free WFPB diet, because they may need to drop the meds very quickly. So, blood pressure medications are neither necessary nor the only practical option.
.
There’s no denying that doctors are addicted to the pills, but those pills are hardly necessary. Yes, pills are the first line of treatment right now, because that’s how our system is set up. That doesn’t mean that pills should be our first line of treatment nor that pills are our best line of treatment. I think that’s what NFmoderatorRenae is saying and I agree.

I would certainly question the wisdom of starting on a plant-based diet and immediately ending blood pressure medication. It takes some time for the changes in the body to take effect. Following your doctor’s advice is important when transitioning. The first thing I did when I decided plant-based was for me was telling my doctor. It is unwise to stop the medication without your doctor’s knowledge, especially if you have been on it for a long time.

Yes, thanks for an interesting and thoughtful post. I would however comment that genetic predisposition does not explain the extremely low or nonexistent rates of obesity in cultures subsisting on traditional high carbon diets. Nor does it explain the relatively low rates of obesity in Western societies a few generations or more ago.
The relative lack of obesity in such cultures and eras suggests that diet and lifestyle are much more important than genes for the overwhelming majority of people.

Thanks for the response. We have only recently entered the labor saving era, in which many people have access to labor saving devices, electrical power, lights and access to a wide variety of food choices. This has certainly changed the way people live from even 50 or 75 years ago. Most likely our genes were selected for the high intensity life style requiring a lot of energy expenditure such as using hand tools in hunting and farming, and limited food choices to what could be either grown, caught or hunted locally.

So our genetic makeup is in conflict with modern life style and diet. No argument there.

I do know obesity did occur in some less developed societies. I read of an account of colonial Pennsylvania in which a grave digger had to dig a “square grave” to be able to bury a very obese person, mentioned in one of the church records from Trinity Lutheran Church in Lancaster, Penn, although I’m sure it was a much rarer condition than now.

Changing life style probably will involve voluntary choices such as exercise, and making different food choices, since most food choices are available at the grocery store or restaurant, rather than growing produce oneself, unless one already lives on a farm or has a garden plot.

Food choices (I am hesitant to even use the term diet anymore since it has been connected to so many different diets, and since it has so many negative implications) and exercise programs will become even more important, however food choices are difficult when faced with the array of advertising about different food products in the mass media.
So you have gotten to the core of the problem, how to increase activity and reduce or change food intake to be similar to that of a subsistence culture in our modern society, and be able to do it on a sustained basis to prevent or relieve obesity.
We don’t even think about the many things in ever day life which are labor saving, from going to a store and buying clothing rather than growing flax, cotton, or shearing sheep and making clothing. Practically everything we do probably has less physical activity than in undeveloped societies and the calories used in exercise as well as the calories consumed all seem to add up.

i am not personally convinced that physical activity is the key factor. Even sedentary people would find it difficult to put on weight or maintain obesity of a diet of boiled potatoes and cabbage, carrots, turnips and the like. These seemed to be the common foods of poor people when I was growing up – the smell of boiled cabbage stays with me (more’s the pity). So, I think what we eat and how much is probably the most important factor. On the other hand, you might be interested in this:

“Obesity may ultimately be a disease of the brain, involving a progressive deterioration of various cognitive processes that influence eating. Researchers at Macquarie University have now shown that memory inhibition — the useful ability to ‘block out’ memories that are no longer useful, which depends on a brain area called the hippocampus — is linked to dietary excess. Usually, food-related memories should be at the forefront during hunger but then inhibited during fullness, so that thoughts of food are set aside when eating is no longer top priority.

Prior animal studies have shown that a Western diet — one high in fats and sugars and low in fruit, vegetable and fiber — impairs the memory inhibition abilities of the hippocampus. Practically, this could mean that a Western-style diet makes it harder to inhibit pleasant memories triggered by seeing or smelling palatable food. This would make it hard to resist delicious treats even if one were full.”https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160712092401.htm

It is the addictive nature of food (sugar and fat) that hijacks the brain. It goes beyond simple will power to resist…. Food manufacturers know the science behind food addiction and use it precisely. Great book “Sugar, Fat, Salt” by Michael Moss illustrates the lengths that big food companies go, in order to reach the “bliss” point of foods…

Yes, thanks, I remember reading somewhere that the food industry sums it up as “no salt, no sugar, no fat equals no taste”. Actually, I find that herbs and spices provide a lot of taste.
On the other hand, the only times I fall off the wagon so to speak involve ice cream – and that is just fat and sugar. So, I am well aware of just how powerful these cravings can be.

It angers me that food companies use the addictive nature of food against the consumer. It is one thing if the foods were healthy and contributed to good health, but the foods they use this science for, is junk food. When counseling my patients, if eating healthier for “health” sake, doesn’t motivate, I will sometimes discuss the ploys, food companies use to “control” food choices. I find many patients don’t like the idea of being controlled… Whatever works!!

Eating is the main thing for most people, even some marathon runners have not lost a lot of weight.

We are living in a different era however than the past. I am convinced that in the era of manual labor, farming with horses or mules, hand milking cattle, or lumberjacks before the days of chain saws when trees were felled with axes and cross cut saws, and of hard labor, building roads and digging canals by hand, those were the days in which very high caloric uptake with lots of fat of all kinds, cream, lard, and bacon were necessary just to maintain body weight.

A modern equivalent I have read a book about would be those people who run the ultramarathons.

I read a book by Dean Karnazes, “Ultra Marathon Man, confessions of an all-night runner” Dean apparently was down to 4.8 % body fat from running, one time eating a pizza and cheesecake while running a marathon.

He would run extreme distances, or ultramarathons, such as the Western States Endurance Run, or running a hundred miles, which would call for running all day and through the night, almost falling asleep while running. He described running the race in 21 hours, one minute and 14 seconds. He came in 14th out of a field of 379, so there are people that do this.

They have to weigh in during the race, and if there is too much weight loss, they are pulled out of the race. Medical complications can be severe in such endurance events if the participant does not have the extreme levels of fitness required.

I am not trying to advertise for him but he has written a number of books, and has a website (DEANKARNAZES, ULTRAMARATHONMAN). He has run up to 350 miles, run across Death Valley in 120 degree temperatures, run a marathon at the south pole in minus 40 degree temps., although reading the account of it, he was just lucky to finish alive, and run 200 mile relay races against 12 man teams on ten different occasions. TIME magazine named him as one of the 100 most influential people in the world.

So there probably was a time in which physical activity burned all the calories that could be consumed and now there are small groups of people, such as the ultramarathon runners who need to eat extreme amounts of food because they are burning calories at such a high rate. Other than that, there’s all the rest of us, and we need to watch what we eat.

Thanks. Yes, i was not trying to imply that physical activity is unimportant – merely that for most of us,it is probably not the most important factor.
But you are right that sustained high levels of physical activity can induce weight loss even for people on high calorie diets – overweight recruits undergoing intense military training lose weight even when fed 5000 calories a day. However, I am not sure that all our ancestors necessarily had very physically active lives that required high levels of energy expenditurehttp://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0040503http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25824106

People did die on the Kempner Rice Diet but I have not seen any reports that anybody developed this particular condition.
“The rice diet did not cure everybody. In Kempner’s original cohort of 192 people, 25 patients died. Of the remaining 167, 60 patients did not substantially improve their blood pressure values. However, 107 patients showed significant improvement (from 200/112 mm Hg to 149/96 mm Hg) with the diet. Heart size decreased in 66 of 72 patients. Serum cholesterol was reduced in 73 of 82 patients. Retinopathy was reduced or disappeared completely in 21 of 33 patients. We must keep these results in context with the times, during which the life expectancy of anyone with malignant hypertension was 6 months.”http://hyper.ahajournals.org/content/64/4/684.full

There were however some claims back in the 1940s that rice promotes production of hepatic tumours. I could not see any evidence for these statements and the claims were made in the context of animal studies (usually rats) fed carcinogenic agents along with particular diets eghttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2135461/

Since then, the claims appear to have disappeared. But they may be the origin of this story? As far as I know, though, high saturated fat diets rather than high carb diets like Kempner’s are more likely to promote this particular conditionhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7892519

I stumbled over that passage as well, but after watching the video, it’s clear the reference is to “the surgical procedure that Dr Kempner wrote about”. Dr G’s referring back to Dr Kempner’s writing about the surgical techniques of his time and the horrid side effects.

Thanks for the information Dr. G. Does it neccessarily hold true that all obese people overeat and/or do not exercise? In my experince the average person who gains weight tries to adjust their behaviour to lose those extra pounds especially by today’s standards where obese people are treated as pariahs and are often blamed for all manner of societal failures. I recently read an article in a national publication where people were warned against ordering food from fat waiters since they would be inclined to overeat. The article went on to say the obese are contagious. Can you imagine the implications this poses to the lives of people who are overweight? Other than forks and exercise, could there be something else going on that is causing this very visible malady?

Obesity is much more than a diet/exercise problem. Although diet and exercise assert a tremendous influence over obesity, there is a whole host of hormonal issues that can contribute as well. Even so, a WFPB diet can be effective at influencing many of the hormonal issues that are contributing to obesity (leptin, growth hormone, insulin, inflammatory, digestive, sex hormones…). It is not easy to find a good synopsis of the many ways that hormones play a role, but the link below is a good start.https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/healthyliving/obesity-and-hormones,

Charmaine: I think the following talk by one of the experts from Forks Over Knives, Doug Lisle, is the best one I have seen to date explaining the phenomenon behind our obesity epidemic. It is so full of helpful information explaining why one person gets fat while another person does not–all while being entertaining. If you get a chance to check it out, let me know what you think.
.
How To Lose Weight Without Losing Your Mindhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAdqLB6bTuQ

The problem is modern “food” is devoid of fundamental components upon which the systems of our bodies have been developed to rely upon.

Eating whole plant foods brings everything back into balance naturally and rather quickly in my personal experience. While there are certainly other specific and rare conditions that could result in morbid obesity, eating too much of this “false food” is the primary cause. There’s no way around that when looking at the general population.

If we could get the general population to understand and begin to resolve this issue (and most of our society begins returning to health instead of the other way ’round) THEN medicine could focus on how to fix the rare and unusual diseases and truly ADVANCE instead of the constant spinning of wheels…

But with BILLIONS of dollars being spent to SELL children and adults on the “wonderful delights” that all our greasy artificial fake devoid products of the Food Industry, it may take a VERY long time to reach the Tipping Point of better health for all. All for the low low price of just by eating better.

There are studies I believe that show that people whose social circles include many overweight individuals, are more likely to put on weight. I do not know about overweight waiters but larger plates have been shown to encourage overeating. There may well be studies showing a similar effect with fat waiters. I would therefore not dismiss such articles as mere prejudice. Psychology is important when food is abundant, cheap and heavily advertised.

Obesity extracts a high price from individuals and society. Just like smoking and alcoholism. None are socially acceptable. People need help to overcome them more than they need social acceptance. In fact social acceptance may worsen problems by reducing incentives to change.

Well there are a bunch of examples of weight loss without the “rice diet” for example:https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2005nl/050100pupushing.htm.
There are similar results from various practitioners see https://www.drfuhrman.com/
Basically these and others are similar with particular emphasis, example for extreme cases of acne no oil at all, …
We do vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, whole grains, B12, … Tons of delicious recipes abound. Oh, omega 3 from algae grown in drinking water just because brain cell walls are made from fats, omega 3 are soft and flexible and less susceptible to autoimmune disease compared to omega 6 hard sticky cell walls susceptible to autoimmune attack. For detail see “Overcoming MS” by Dr. George Jelinek.
So what foods are people designed for? See primatologist Dr. Jane Goodall “Seeds of Hope”. We have general purpose teeth fine for soft leaves, fruits, nuts, seeds, shoots, a mildly acidic stomach and an intestinal tract maybe five times our height for fermenting and digesting plant foods. Carnivores have sharp teeth, highly acidic stomachs where most digestion takes place, and intestinal tract about as long as they are to get rid of the waste before it putrefies.

Calorie-restriction diets tend to work for reduction, but tend to fail on long-term behavior modification. Accepting that, and changing one’s behavior to a life-long self-sustainable method of food selection is the only complete answer. But the point of the video is that significant dietary modification is not so radical as body modification and/or taking Rx drugs of often unknown consequences. The trick is making it stick, which I feel isn’t that difficult now that I’m doing it.

It’s like everything else “Education”. You need the skills necessary to lose weight. There is a trick to it, that you cannot figure out on your own and need to learn from others that have done it. Once you learn the trick then you lose the unwanted weight automatically, gradually without dieting or any unnatural force. I was 20-45LBs overweight all my 20s, and 30s. I tried everything, but nothing worked. Then I saw some animal torture videos. Cut animal products and not even realizing it, I slowly lost weight. Once I discovered that I was a Herbivore, weight-loss became faster. Overall, I lost about 1/3 of my body weight without even trying.

She’s eating animal products at every meal. Calorie restriction works for weight loss (you could eat nothing but butter and lose weight if you ate below what you burned), but her diet won’t do anything for her long-term health. Great discipline on the exercise, though.

From Google: “% of overweight americans” (copy/pasted): “More than one-third (35.7 percent) of adults are considered to be obese. More than 1 in 20 (6.3 percent) have extreme obesity. Almost 3 in 4 men (74 percent) are considered to be overweight or obese. The prevalence of obesity is similar for both men and women (about 36 percent).” Why ? Isn’t this proof that we are NOT “Omnivores” and that “Omnivore Diet” is NOT natural for humans ? Especially since a vegan or “Plant Based Diet” not only solves obesity disease but also 90% of other human diseases.

Actually, if we think of ourselves as a biological machine, like a gooey computer, I see us more as an animal that with cultural intelligence or scientific intelligence is meant to move away from the consumption of other sentient animals because it’s the healthiest and more conscientious way to live and because it connects us more deeply to the consciousness that is the source of life.. Many cultures have developed that move away from or minimize the consumption of meat, but ours just didn’t.
Now we get to choose. Do we do this because this is the healthiest way to live and it will profoundly affect global climate change, or do we choose tasty, because that is what we crave and because it makes some people rich.

“biological machine, like a gooey computer, ” I assume you mean like a super-intelligent Robot ! I agree with you 100% ! And the reason plant foods are as you correctly stated “HEALTHIEST” is because we are biologically “HERBIVORES”. You don’t pour diesel into a Jet or Jet fuel in a boat. The same way we are designed to eat plants. Of course as herbivores we deeply care for and love other animals and it hurts us deeply that billions of animals/kids are being caged, tortured beyond belief in this USA now and butchered simply because of extreme ignorance of the public caused by private enterprise manipulating US media with censorship and billions of dollars of advertising lies & for profit propaganda.

I agree that we are supposed to be eating a WFPB diet, that the “machinery” does best on this diet and that the biome created is the most healthy.

This is where I am taking the discussion though; I think that as a thinking species who has reached the highest level of intelligence in the evolutionary process on this planet, we have to recognize that we are tied to the Earth and each other. The process that most ties us to the Earth and that is the best for the Earth is consuming plants and not eating animal products.

Our reason for not eating animals in not just our physical health, It’s for the health of the Earth as well. By moving all humans to the consumption of plants and by minimizing the consumption of animals, we elevate ourselves because it is the biome that creates the connection to the consciousnesses that is life, and hence to the Earth.

If we don’t stop eating animals, because of the way the “program” is written that we “gooey computers” are running on, then we are going to go extinct.

One biome is life, the other is death. The one that we are eating a whole bunch of right now, has made us create all the problems you just illuminated.

Dr. Lovelock’s algorithm written to prove the “Gaia Theorem” is called “Daisy World.” and it really may be true. I may just be that simple; white daisy or black daisy, we get to choose and we get to live with it.

I don’t think hunger is a factor in obesity. Therefore, stopping hunger doesn’t cure the problem of obesity. Fat people don’t eat because they are hungry. At least that’s never my motivation. Even now, as a vegan, I find myself reaching for food when I’m not hungry. It’s an addiction.

I lost twenty kilos on a ketogentic diet, loads of fish, vegetables, loads of nuts, salads and eggs/cheese milk. Healthy as, and low blood pressure from the lower waist measure, and my triglycerides .2 doctor very happy. Never felt better. I think there are lots of ways to lose weight, the best way is the way you can stick to. the ketogenic diets works for me and my husband because we just don’t get hungry.

Sure. You can lose weight on the Twinkie Diet too and your biomarkers will also improve because you have lost weight. Those are short term effects. That does not, however, mean that the Twinkie Diet (or the keto diet) automatically delivers long term health.

Dmarg that is awesome. I feel people get so wrapped up in the carb versus fat debate that they are fearful to try something new if what they are doing is not working. This is essentially in line with Dr. David Lugwig is promoting. Fat is not a dietary evil and lumping fat together is overly simplistic. One cannot just say fat is unhealthy due to the wide range of types of fat. Cholesterol from food simply does not raise serum cholesterol an appreciable extent. Saturated fat may raise LDl cholesterol what the effect on LDL p or particle number does not change is my understanding which is a much better predictor. Sizes of LDL particles goes up with saturated fat but not the number. Fat creates a sensation of satiety which lasts while high glycemic index foods do not. Looking at the number of calories per gram is overly simplistic and is not representative of how energy homeostasis is maintained. Having food be voluminous makes it harder to eat a lot of calories at one time but if it’s low in calories you will get hungry sooner the body had mechanisms to keep your weight at a certain point. Calories in equals calories out is true in the physics sense but people misinterpret the meaning when it comes to nutrition and weight homeostasis. Look at feeding studies some people have a super hard time gaining weight despite copious calories. The inverse is low calorie diets people have a tremendously hard time maintaining weight loss. If you feel great and your bio markers have improved keep doing what your doing. Using how you feel and those makers as a gauge of he success of your diet/life style. If a person tries a diet and had to force themselves to not eat because they are hungry maybe they need to try something different. There isn’t a perfect diet for everyone. That doesn’t mean there isn’t a diet that won’t work for an individual person.

Morton Malcom Machir: So many of your statements are not supported by the evidence we get from the science. Here’s one example. You wrote: “Saturated fat may raise LDl cholesterol what the effect on LDL p or particle number does not change is my understanding which is a much better predictor. Sizes of LDL particles goes up with saturated fat but not the number.” Particle size is not a good predictor at all if one is trying to avoid heart attacks. Check out this video from NutritionFacts: Does Cholesterol Size matter? http://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-cholesterol-size-matter/
.
I understand that the ideas in your post are widely circulated. But that doesn’t mean that they are true. I invite you to explore the information on this site. I can make some suggestions if you are interested.

Keto diets are the golden child of the animal agriculture industry just like Round-up is the golden child of Monsanto. They are not designed for health. They are designed to push book and supplement sales for those looking to cash in on the same diet craze Atkins was tapping into. A billion dollar industry driven by consumer ignorance of the dangers of too much fat, meat, eggs and dairy and not enough fiber.

High fat Ketogenic diets are very trendy in the media right now but they are not a healthy way to lose weight. They put the body into a state of sickness called Lipotoxicity and can have long term negative effects on your health even after they are stopped. High fat Ketogenic diets have been shown to destroy pancreatic beta cells worsening type 2 diabetes. Insulin sensitivity plummets in the presence of too much fat in the blood. Long term sustained saturated fat intake has wide reaching negative health implications on several organs… The liver, heart, kidneys all are negatively affected by the lipotoxic effect of high fat diets. You are in effect making yourself sick to lose weight.

I would highly recommend anyone considering such a diet to explore the many reasons Dr G advises against ketogenic diets. I would not put my health at that level of risk from a diet that directly contributes to beta cell death and promotes insulin disfunction. A much healthier way to loss weight would be a WFPB diet based on the science that Dr G presents here.

High fat Ketogenic diets are very trendy in the media right now but
they are not a healthy way to lose weight. They put the body into a
state of sickness called Lipotoxicity and can have long term negative
effects on your health even after they are stopped. High fat Ketogenic
diets have been shown to destroy pancreatic beta cells worsening type 2
diabetes. Insulin sensitivity plummets in the presence of too much fat
in the blood. Long term sustained saturated fat intake has wide reaching
negative health implications on several organs… The liver, heart,
kidneys all are negatively affected by the lipotoxic effect of high fat
diets. You are in effect making yourself sick to lose weight.

I
would highly recommend anyone considering such a diet to explore the
many reasons Dr G advises against ketogenic diets. I would not put my
health at that level of risk from a diet that directly contributes to
beta cell death and promotes insulin disfunction. A much healthier way
to loss weight would be a WFPB diet based on the science that Dr G
presents here.

High fat Ketogenic diets are very trendy in the media right now but
they are not a healthy way to lose weight. They put the body into a
state of sickness called Lipotoxicity and can have long term negative
effects on ones health even after they are stopped. High fat Ketogenic
diets have been shown to destroy pancreatic beta cells worsening type 2
diabetes. You are in effect making yourself sick to lose weight. Here is a great
that speaks directly about LIPOTOXICITY.

There are loads of testimonials for weight loss, but what about long-term weight maintenance in the century club? Isn’t anyone doing research on these people? If it can be shown that a specific diet can maintain (or aid in maintenance) of body mass and/or assist in resetting a set-point to a lower mass, then this would be powerful, world-changing news.

It would be great if these took into account risks associated with being overweight/obese vs any health risks from fasting. E.g. does evidence suggest one is better served healthwise by consuming something like 1/3 portions of the Daily Dozen items as a power-packed salad every second day (which would be the fast day), and the full Daily Dozen in 3 meals on the next day (a feast day), thus potentially losing weight more quickly and presumably reduces obesity-related risks more quickly as a result. Or is it less risky/healthier (if there are health impacts to fasting) to be more patient in letting the risk-reducing effects of Daily Dozen nutrition alone take its course without fasting?

Is there any advice or science regarding menopausal (and post-menopausal) women having difficulty losing weight on a WFPB diet, with no added salt, sugar or oil?

Three friends and I, all in this category are all having trouble. Our husbands (2 of them) who decided to eat this way as well, quickly lost the few extra pounds (about 10 pounds) they had been carrying around, but the 4 of us are struggling- not really losing any weight. One of us decided to try 80% raw, and while she eats raw she keeps the weight off, but during the winter when she eats mostly cooked foods, she gains weight quickly. All of us live in climates with cold winters and warm summers. We range in age from 50-60. Most of us also exercise regularly (30-60 minutes daily).

We all have positive benefits- less inflammation, no more pain, more energy, sleeping better, etc… Just not losing weight- and we all have a lot to lose- ranging from 30-80 pounds.

In this video, Kemper’s diet was 25g of protein. I am having a hard time finding an answer to my question around protein. If I want to lose weight, what is the minimum amount of protein I need. I’ve seen the equation of .36g per pound…but in every context I’ve read its for maintaining your weight. What if you want to lose weight? Every example is for the “average” woman or for a body builder. I love eating plant based – I’ve never felt better. But, according to the equation, I should be eating over 83g of protein – and I struggle with that – I want to be the woman who only needs about 40g. When I started tracking the amount of protein I was eating, I realized I was well under .36g per pound. Of course, we need protein – and of course, we don’t need too much – but…if you want to lose weight….should it be lower than .36g per pound. Is 25g of protein the minimum that I should shoot for? Aside: I did the Rice Diet years ago and it worked beautifully for weight loss because the initial few weeks is rice & fruit, then you continue to add plants. I found it effective for resetting my palate for salt and sugar.

There was an interesting article in the oddity section on AP this week about an obese monkey in Thailand. “Thailand’s chunky monkey on diet after gorging on junk food”. If you haven’t seen it yet, it looks like something Dr.Greger would find interesting.

Yes, the weight stayed off as long as I ate plant based.
I’ve lost over 40# this year following plant based guidelines.
I still have more to lose and I want to understand the role of protein in weight loss. I might make different choices. The rice diet is great, it’s not easy, but it’s really low calorie.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment

Name *

Email *

Website

Participate in this discussion via e-mail!Get only replies to your comment, the best of the rest, as well as a daily recap of all comments on this post. No more than a few emails daily, which you can reply to/unsubscribe from directly from your inbox.

Subscribe to NutritionFacts.org Videos

By subscribing, you will automatically receive the latest videos emailed to you or downloaded to your computer or portable device. Select the subscription method below that best fits your lifestyle.